Justice: What's The Right Thing To Do?
Lecture One
PART ONE: THE MORAL SIDE OF MURDER
If you had to choose between (1)
killing one person to save the lives of five others and (2) doing
nothing even though you knew that five people would die right before
your eyes if you did nothing—what would you do? What would be the right
thing to do? Thats the hypothetical scenario Professor Michael Sandel
uses to launch his course on moral reasoning. After the majority of
students votes for killing the one person in order to save the lives of
five others, Sandel presents three similar moral conundrums—each one
artfully designed to make the decision more difficult. As students
stand up to defend their conflicting choices, it becomes clear that the
assumptions behind our moral reasoning are often contradictory, and the
question of what is right and what is wrong is not always black and
white.
PART TWO: THE CASE FOR CANNIBALISM
Sandel introduces the
principles of utilitarian philosopher, Jeremy Bentham, with a famous
nineteenth century legal case involving a shipwrecked crew of four.
After nineteen days lost at sea, the captain decides to kill the
weakest amongst them, the young cabin boy, so that the rest can feed on
his blood and body to survive. The case sets up a classroom debate
about the moral validity of utilitarianism—and its doctrine that the
right thing to do is whatever produces "the greatest good for the
greatest number."